I never took out a loan back in the days and I would not qualify as a foreign exchange student. I went to a new school where they charged the 1/3 of the tuition of the nearest state university. Even then it was no big deal to come up with that amount every three months. I was lucky.

I find 100-150 thousand dollars debt upon graduation from architecture school and having to pay $1000-1500 per month for many years is an ultimate chain to the jobs graduates find like a death sentence for creative growth. It leaves almost no alternatives but get up and go to a "j.o.b." everyday of one's useful life in most cases. It is an antithesis to what students are fed in architecture schools in terms of what they will become upon graduation. So, there is a "lie" or "myth" aspect to all this as well.

I see, for the most, defaults on their student loans and become credit risk for long time and eventually be pushed to the peripheries of the society at large. It is not a joke that the possibility that the architecture school graduates waiting on a food stamp application line at the government offices in the near future if not already, even though it is true that majority of architects still come from upper middle class and well off families.

We are also talking about a profession which is continuously redefining its production technology and methods, and its personnel needs. If transparent, statistics by related organizations like NCARB, AIA and state boards can provide reliable numbers to project the prospects of the profession.

This field also directly responds to economic fluctuations of the markets and very difficult to predict its course.

We all have to play the hand we're dealt. Whining about it and trying to throw the blame on others may temporarily cause you to feel a bit better, but it doesn't do a single damn thing to change your situation.

that's your last post in the previous thread.  what i understand that to mean is that those born in a lower caste should be expected to stay there.  i don't really care if you don't want filthy rabble like me at your dinner parties, but it does piss me off when you take away opportunity that should be available to me. 

by the way, that isn't a generational gap, that's class warfare.

Simplistically, the high cost of higher education and the loan crisis exists because of the economy. Less tax revenue = budget cuts = less funding to state schools = higher tuition = higher student loans. Don't get me started on government backed loans which guarantee the student can qualify for that high loan which means the schools can charge whatever rate they want knowing the student WILL get that loan.

The first adult decision an 18 yr old aspiring architect faces is "what school shall I attend?" It is up to them to determine what's the best fit and to separate want from need. 

I need at least a 5th yr degree to get licensed. I want to go to this school. 

I can go to this in-state school for $40K or I want to go to this other school on the coast for $120K. Most states have an NAAB accredited program and if the young lad's ultimate goal is to become licensed, then the cheaper in-state route makes financial sense. However, if they want a "quality" education, it comes at a premium. The "right" to education (affordable) isn't hindered one bit as it is completely up to the young adult to decide. It's not class warfare when education is accessible and open for all (loans, grants, scholarships, trust funds, etc.).

Some would have you believe that a degree is more valuable than a license. I've heard those with a Master's and zero experience believe they're more qualified than others who're licensed. That theory and pedagogy or whatever you may call it has very little weight in the workplace, which is why many return to teach. A degree from a top university perhaps will help you land that first job but after that it's just "are you licensed, can you detail, do you know this software, when can you start." 

The young adult shall weigh the options and costs of his/her wants and needs. What are your goals? A license to practice? A quality, fundamentally theoretical education? At what cost? No route is the wrong or right one but is for the individual to decide. And each route has an associated price tag.

babs - danke. 

but, for this particular thread, i've personally come around a lot on my thinking. 5 years ago? i'd have echoed you word for word. it's only as i've seen some of the loans my students were taking out that's changed the thinking some. 

yes, there are choices that can be made to diminish (or even eliminate) the costs of getting a degree. but architecture isn't a degree in accounting. it's tough to pull down a job and get the grades you need. not impossible (and i'm not whining since this is long ancient history for me personally), but if -if - you "miss" on one semester, you could find yourself out of the program and potentially out of whatever scholarships you had. that's a tough gamble to take in the 'here and now' to help offset loans you'll still be taking out in the end.

you can choose, with a professional degree, to skip grad school (just don't have any aspirations to teach unless you're a rockstar, published designer). but, i'll be honest and say that the march II degree i got from harvard 15ish years ago wouldn't be nearly as obtainable today as it was then. the costs would certainly be much more of a factor seeing as they've doubled + since then. add to that the fact that the large public research universities (the ones which usually house the architecture programs) have, at least in georgia, nearly doubled in tuition over the past 4 years... look, i get why they're pissed. i'm pissed - 

so. do we take responsibility for borrowing 100k +? yes. is it the fault of the students? yes and no. is it the responsibility of our generation(s) to figure out how to solve this? yes. 

do i think the boomers have f-d up the economy? well, i will say this. that generation of leaders haven't done much (at the national level) except keep putting off the hard decisions. left, right and center. now that the reckoning has come, can you blame those younger than us for having so many fewer opportunities than their elders?

curt - I think your interpretation of my intent is a stretch. I really was addressing Rand's 11:34 and 12:14 posts, in which he blamed 'the older generation' for causing all the ills of 'the current generation' - if not of society in general. I was suggesting that every generation has its own challenges and every generation must find its own responses to those challenges. For example my grandfather came of age during the Great Depression; my mother came of age during WW2; I came of age during the 'stagflation' and 'hyperinflation' of the mid-70s; my own children came of age during the post 9/11 era; recent graduates today are coming of age in the midst of the Great Recession. Each example represents its own set of problems and appropriate responses. Class warfare was nowhere in my mind. Sorry if that was not sufficiently clear. Nevertheless, you do raise an important point. People growing up with different means clearly have different options, and challenges, when it comes to education. I personally believe education can be a great leveler of economic circumstances, but I don't believe anyone should mortgage their entire future in order to obtain an architecture degree - the economics of the profession simply don't support that notion. However, that's not to suggest that only the rich should pursue careers in architecture. There are ways for anyone to obtain an architecture degree without amassing unmanageable debt - but those solutions require creativity, discipline, and very hard work. My bottom line view is that our profession cannot, as a general rule, provide compensation during the early years of a career sufficient to retire high levels of student debt. To bring a large loan with you from college leads to [voluntary] servitude, which is not a happy way to start a career.

now that the reckoning has come, can you blame those younger than us for having so many fewer opportunities than their elders?

But... but, there's so many more opportunities if you have a near perfect credit rating, at least 3 months income in savings, a generously funded 401(k), a new vehicle, half-a-dozen rental references and a fixed-interest mortgage in a stunning but "comfortable," quiet suburb!

There is a lot hyperbole out there that is not based on any real understanding of the cost of grad school or the repayment of loans. My guess is that babs doesn't have student loan debt so is really only commenting on what he perceives to be a hypothetical situation. That's fine, but I think the issue is quite a bit more nuanced. For instance, the $100K figure is thrown out there a lot, and frankly I don't think having a $100K in student loan debt is all that common. I have $80K and my wife has $80K (we met in grad school). We've consolidated our loans and pay $340 and $420 per month respectively. Yes, we will be paying them from here to eternity, but they are manageable as a monthly expenditure. I often think, "Well, we could have bought $160K more house or gone to grad school." I'm comfortable with our decision. We were both fortunate to have retained our jobs through the last four years, but even if one or both of us were to have lost our jobs Income Based Repayment would have guaranteed that we would not be on the line for the full amount while we were getting back on our feet. It's fair.

We both have federal loans that provide many manageable repayment options. Private student loans are a racket and should be avoided like the plague. I also think that the cost of tuition has become completely ridiculous and that this is a problem that we as a society need to confront. While I don't disagree that student loans are a matter of personal responsibility, saddling a generation with massive debt coming out of school, is not good for our economy or the American people.

All in all I don't think I would have done anything differently, and I do take responsibility for the loans I have, but there are larger systemic and societal issues that need to be addressed around our higher educational system.

Babs:

The younger generation did not create the problem situation, they just naively bought into it, and did not realize till after they graduated the situation they got themselves into. The whole situation was designed and enforced by individuals and groups within the older generation. You seem to assume that those who are younger magically have some level of omniscience.

Also, at school I had to pay a fee for our transit system built into our tuition, which I never used due to how close I was to campus. Then for architecture, like other schools, we had to pay professional fees that we were told was for our computer associated costs (which we were scorned for using early on), but it was enough to buy all the software and individual would need in addition to a new computer each year. We later cam to find out that money instead went to hire certain staff members who only were involved with a minority of the student population.

And to the comments I previously made that you are referring to did not place blame on the entire older generation, but instead I used the qualifying term "part". I did this purposely to oppose your blanket statements against the younger generations. You should be careful about age discrimination lest another discrimination thread is started.

Oh My!

here we go again.

Beating a dead horse party being!

Rand - my EXACT words were "... naiveté on the part of too many students." - how is that a "blanket" accusation? Seems to me I approached this exactly as did you.

When you frequently state "you" are you referring to me, or my generation?

Hey babs, I got an honest question for you.

You seem like an intelligent old fart that did well for himself. Probably 30 years removed from education halls. 20 years since licensure. 

Why does this topic bug you so much? I took note of your "personal responsibility" comment. It's the perpetual wet blanket to any meaningful political discourse. You can't seriously make me believe that any multi-billion-dollar clusterfuck comes down to personal responsibility. So what's your stake in this discourse that points out system failure?

the younger generation inherited so many problems from the boomers.  we have the right to complain and question.  If student debt is our personal responsibility, then  you old dudes need to take personal responsibilty  for melting the fucking ice caps, creating a nation of stripmalls and gas stations, socially degraded gated communities, suburban poverty, urban gentrification, fat annoying kids stuffed full of mechanicaly seperated chicken and corn syrup........

Entitlement Generation perhaps?

Mommy, I cleaned my room as you've suggested now where is my allowance? Johnny, mommy lost her job last week, I'm sorry but we don't have any money left. YOU PROMISED ME MY ALLOWANCE!!! WHERE IS IT!!!! I WANT IT NOWWWW!!! ARGGHHHHHH!!!! (extrapolate at own risk)

Every generation inherits something...and usually it isn't prosperity (other than the boomers but crap they had Vietnam). It is up to the current generation to play the cards they are dealt. Once they stop looking for someone else to blame, which is a common occurrence in today's society, THEN can they move on. Old guys accept responsibility for global warming...they all die in a few years, now what? The ice caps are still melting. It's YOUR problem now regardless who created it. You are responsible for YOUR OWN actions regardless who dealt the cards.  

From an early Gen Y

jla-x,

those issues, products, and developmental patterns you pointed out weren't known to be negative 50-60 years ago. It's only through their trial that they were found to be in error. That's how history works. 50 years from now I'm sure we'll see that a lot of the choices our generation made will have been less than ideal.

I've been thinking about this a lot lately. There is absolutely no reason for 6.8 or higher interest rates especially  when there is no risk of defaulting. Other than greed of course. 

I would propose alternative crowd source funding for college like kickstarter or micro loans. Why not even just a simple non-profit that will lend money to qualified applicants at 3%. 

At this point people need to start exploring other options. 

Entitlement Generation perhaps?

perhaps you mean the people who say "I paid my dues" and expect other people to take care of them while they keep getting a little fatter, lazier, and dumber?  i think they can try to help fix some of the bad decisions their peers made before they die.

This discourse should remain within the context of architecture and its cost/payoff. I would also suggest to please refrain from name calling or mockery, it only weakens ones argument.

The issue remains, there were those who orchestrated and administered a certain agenda that took/is taking advantage of the ill informed youth of the current generation who have been pushed their whole lives to buy into it and are now trapped for life. During this time there has been little reaction from a majority of those within the propagating generation, except for those worried parents who were unable to afford to aid their child's education, but would not want their children to live in the same financial situation they had to deal with or were not well educated enough to understand it themselves.

Being able to take advantage of a whole generation or stand by and watch them be taken advantage of due to their naivete is no justification for a "hand you are dealt" claim. If someone is laying, bleeding on the sidewalk from a crime you do not just say "good luck, have fun with that hand you were dealt". You first try to help the person in a means that doesn't also harm others, followed by a cooperative effort to solve the cause. The argument that "every generation gets screwed, and now its your turn" is also no justification. These attitudes are quite selfish and simplified.

This situation we are finding ourselves in won't effect just a single generation, it will spread to the older and still to come generations in a wider economic and social scope. It has been claimed that this current problem is the fault of the naivete of youth, even if that is the case, it is far more naive to assume it does not affect you or will not effect your grandchildren. 

As it pertains to architecture, Architects don't retire, they die with pencil in hand, no entitlement there. The current loan and education situation is not a simple cause/effect/solution. Like the housing crisis, so many causes/effects but little solutions other than default.

Cause: multiple variables, very complex, inflation, bad economy, global economy, outsourcing, mis-education, naivety, low tax revenue, reduced funding, too many people with not enough jobs, etc. 

Effect: higher interest rates, unemployment, over-saturation, disgruntled participants (architects, students, interns, cad monkeys)

Solution: a better economy??

So we can understand that we don't comprehend (or even have to authority to change) the cause nor the solution, but we know its effects.

It's like kudzu, can't fix the problem without going to the root, and the roots are so complex there's little we can do. You can always wait for the system to come crashing down but in the mean time, you have to decide either to watch from the sidelines or conform to survive by learning to deal with it. We can discuss (not argue) the best ways we can navigate through this tumultuous environment but will we ever make it back to land, perhaps, perhaps not.

It seems like it IS crashing down right about now. 

One solution I can think of is to put student loan counseling in high schools (maybe on college fair days or SAT days) instead of just in colleges. I picked my college, major, and graduated high school at 16, and did not talk to anyone about student loans until I was on campus, had paid a tuition deposit and housing for a semester. My parents had no idea about how that all worked, because college was so cheap when they went to school that they could work part-time jobs that enabled them to afford living expenses and tuition. They also had the impression that if you work hard in your first year or two, someone will offer to pay for the rest. Seriously. These are college educated, successful people, but that's how it worked for them so that's how they thought it would work for me. If we're going to put this down to personal responsibility, then let's offer tools for students to make better choices, before they've committed. 

I know there's a lot more that's wrong with the system that we can't do anything about, but that is one thing that we could actually have an impact on. 

the rising cost of education and predatory student loan policies predate the start of the bad economy by several years, so a better economy alone isn't a fix to the problem.

one way to start fixing the problem is to vote and explain to others why their choices and their votes should encourage better regulation of the financial industry.  the federal stafford program, and maybe a few similar programs, has a great deal of control over how the student loan industry works and it's policies are not created solely by a caucus of evil bankers, it's controlled and regulated by people YOU and your peers vote for.  send emails to your congressional representatives and ask them if they think there is something they can do to help.  let them know this is a real problem.  get them to regulate sallie mae until they're crushed to dirt.

remember the last time evil bankers profited from making loans they knew would fail?

I think the problem is that a college degree has about the same relative worth as a highschool degree had 30-40 years ago.  Those well paying factory jobs are mostly gone.   Now, we have a choice between a life of debt or a life of working at target and living in poverty.  We should extend public education to include at least two years of undergraduate education.  you graduate highschool in 14th grade with all the required college classes complete. 

Higher education and student loan financing has become a Ponzi scheme. It didn't used to be, but it has been for probably 20 years or more. That's not a popular thing to say, but it's true. The epithet precisely applies.

gwhorton: would you care to explain how you see this 'ponzi scheme' working?

Actually, I mis-wrote. I meant Pyramid Scheme, not Ponzi Scheme. Though the two cons have a lot in common, they are distinct from one another.

2. I don't agree that my entire generation (that'd be the "boomers" to you young sprouts) is solely responsible for a) the dismal state of the current economy, b) the escalating cost of education, or c) the penchant of some students to take out loans they can't possibly expect to repay.

who the hell do you think co-signs those loans?

It sucks that there are at least two typos in that graphic. Also it sucks to owe 1.5 times my gross yearly income- but if I keep up and pay back at 25% of my earnings, I'll be out before I'm 30. Just in time to buy a house?........

@toaster: "who the hell do you think co-signs those loans?"

Not the entire boomer generation -- probably some parents of some students.

I kinda liked that graphic till the end. Am I reading this right? That you can either work hard and be diligent and frugal OR bitch and moan.

The whining happens because 10 years ago frugality was not part of the academic sales pitch. It was all pro-growth and prosperity.

Whining back at whiners is to turn a deaf ear.

Since average student loan debt is around $25k while the debt incurred by those who report theirs here on archinect seems to be at $100k or higher, would it be accurate to say that the delusions are mostly held by those attending architecture school? Nah, architects are known for their firm grip on reality, right?

http://www.aia.org/advocacy/AIAB094297

$40,000 seems average for architect students.  I suppose for everyone with $100,000 of debt there is someone who's parents pay their way. 

It is possible half of us are idiots.  maybe that's where get the stereotype that architects are notoriously bad at business (and spelling, grammar, punctuation, capitalizing letters, etc.)

The fact that architecture school can cost almost a quarter of a million dollars is astonishing.

Collective delusion? probably, and someone else said "collective inferiority complex,"

Don't some people here put us on par with doctors? I try to take the debt as a sign that architecture still has some dignity, but I'm not in over 100k.

While I would certainly say that the Boomers are not really responsible for the catastrophic economic conditions we're now facing (that's mostly the fault of the G.I. Generation, compounded by the the Silent Generation...the Boomers just played along and are being unfairly blamed for it now), the situation in higher education really is the Boomers' fault. When the Baby Boom generation rebelled against the social order through cultural activism, one of the main ways they did that was through subverting and then taking over the university system. Once they all got tenure and/or administrative control, they pulled the ladders up behind them, and then used that position to set up the pyramid scheme we have now in higher ed.

Short of transforming the system, there are steps individuals can take to avoid financial disillusionment. The happy medium is called RESPONSIBLE DEBT, and this is usually defined as not taking on any school debt beyond what you anticipate making your first year out of said school (it's relative for different professions, but the rule of thumb applies to all professions). Realistically for architects, 35-40k is a responsible amount of debt for an undergraduate degree in architecture. 60-80k (total school debt including undergrad) is a responsible amount of debt for someone with a grad degree, but it's also your responsibility to go out and find a job that pays you that much out of school, not just work for free somewhere and scowl at the system.

Unfortunately this involves compromise. Sometimes it's not responsible for you to go to the ivy league school that you got accepted to, but weren't able to secure a scholarship for or maybe your undergrad debt is so high you need to work a few more years to pay it off before going back to grad school or sometimes you take the corporate job because you were overzealous with our loan money.  No financial aid officer is going to tell you to be realistic about your finances. It's not their job to. The fact of the matter is post K-12 education is not an entitlement in this country, and students should not view it as such. 

just for arguments sake...what if the university itself was the only lender...?

would they have more of a stake in grads being ready for the job market and finding a job?

would they be more careful who they lend to?

would they go broke?

Not the entire boomer generation -- probably some parents of some students.

no - not entire boomer generation - but specifically for undergrad - you need to show your parents' income (and other info) in order to qualify for a federal loans and other forms of student aid.  parents who aren't sitting down with their kids and helping them plan their future  (i.e. just how much school is really going to cost them when they get out) are just as culpable.  someone coming out of undergrad with tons of debt very likely has clueless/stupid/irresponsible parents.    a large majority of undergrads have to go through this application process.  of course we cannot be mad at our parents for living in a world where college still costs $5000 and you can get a decent job earning at least twice that straight out of undergrad.

Grad school is a completely different story...  that's when you get to be stupid on your own.

Heavymetalarchtecture made an interesting point that seems to not be addressed - the loan rates seem kind of high!

If the government had set up some kind of trust fund or co-op for covering student tuition instead of a corporation, I wonder the picture would look a lot different right now.

Look at what the credit card companies get away with on interest. 25% percent interest charged, and the banks get to borrow from the U.S. Fed., at a little over 1/2 percent, thank you Mr. Bernanke!

I agree about the interest rates. They've masked the situation with the 'Income Based Repayment Plan'  to help out grads when in fact the government is the only one to gain from it. First they monopolized loan consolidation, then they lower your payments based on income, but that just means they extend your term and you accrue more interest off your principal which gets compounded more since you are taking longer to pay it off. Then when  the 25 years are up, you have to pay 30% of it that year in taxes. Basically we're getting pimped by uncle same. 'payment relief', YES. 'debt relief', NO.  If the administration was serious about it, they would lower interest rates across the board to 3% for new and old loans.

Tim, agreed, the interest is one of the big reasons student loans are crushing us all. I looked at the income-based plans, but saw that if I did any of them I would wind up paying more in total. On the other hand, for every extra $100 I pay towards my loan now, I'll reduce my total payments by $65 in the end. So I'm cutting out any non-necessities and trying to get these things out of the way as quickly as possible.